Submission> Senate Inquiry > Newman’s Queensland Government

10 November 2014

Select Committee into Certain Aspects of Queensland Government Administration PO Box 6100 Parliament House ACT 2600




    1. In August 2007 while Premier Newman was Lord Mayor of Brisbane I was issued a development approval for a small 4 townhouse development.
    2. The development approval contained 4 errors in the conditions, 2 of them being extortion which prevented me from developing my property.
    3. Complaints were first made to the CMC, then the Police and to the Queensland Ombudsman as well as to the Police Minister and the Premier. Nothing was done except to be referred to the Planning and Environment court which would have cost in excess of $50,000 to have the Council errors removed from the development approval.
    4. The Queensland Ombudsman had a statutory duty to ensure the proper administration of the blatant Council criminal errors instead of condoning Mal Administration and also for trying to further extort me, i.e. if I want to remove the Council errors I have to pay in excess of $50,000 in court costs or I can’t develop my property.
    5. In April 2008 Lord Mayor Newman orders a review of the Development Approval and in the report 6 weeks later on a Lord Mayoral letterhead, Newman details changes to the conditions and signs off on instructions for a fraudulent engineering certificate to cover up the extortion.
    6. The fraudulent Council instructed engineering certificate was rejected by Building Certifiers Consultants in an affidavit form for not complying with the condition.
    7. Lord Mayor Newman committed a criminal offence by re-opening my development approval, being a sealed document to change the conditions.
    8. This is verified by the then BCC CEO Jude Munro in a letter unknowing that Newman had made changes to the conditions, stating that it was illegal to make changes to a sealed document.
    9. This letter was ‘doctored’ and submitted in affidavit form by Council solicitor Katherine Johnson to the P&E court in 2011 in an attempt to extricate Newman for criminally supporting changes to my development approval.
    10. Judge Griffin in the P&E court accepted Council’s excuse that CEO Munro’s ‘doctored’ letter was a first draft. So in effect Council’s CEO Munro first drafted a letter extricating Newman from a crime and thought better of it and then issued a letter implicating Newman in a crime. Council solicitor Johnson should have been cited for perjury.
    11. In 2009/2010 I took to protesting in the lunch hours with a placard outside Council’s administration building.
    12. Council’s Rapid Response Group, whilst protesting issued to me under the Council’s advertising by-laws a $500 fine which they withdrew 12 months later and numerous ‘Move On’ notices carrying $5,000 fines again under the Advertising by-laws for lawfully protesting.            
    13. On 15 December 2010, 3 police officers, arrived where I was protesting outside the Council Admin building and stood close by me which was blatant intimidation. When questioned, the officer said they were waiting for a Council officer to arrive with a ‘Move On’ notice and they were going to move me out of the city.
    14. The police officers Sargent Van Boxel, Sargent Schodell, and Sen. Const. Plevey waited for almost an hour and finally rang Council security and a security officer came out and was clueless about a ‘Move On’ notice. The cops then realized they were conned, lured by False Pretenses by Council to intimidate me and then departed.
    15. I made complaints to the Premier, the Police Minister and the Police Commissioner and the CMC of being intimidated by the cops and of the cops being conned by Council, no action was taken, however, Newman (was forced) resigned 3 months later.
  • Newman’s Council’s intimidation tactics of a $500 fine, ‘Move On’ notices and the luring of the Police to prevent me from conducting a lawful political protest is in breach of Section 10 of the Queensland Criminal Code.Chapter 10 Offences against political liberty

    78 Interfering with political liberty

    (1) Any person who by violence, or by threats or intimidation of

    any kind, hinders or interferes with the free exercise of any

    political right by another person, is guilty of a misdemeanour,

    and is liable to imprisonment for 2 years.

    (2) If the offender is a public officer, and commits the offence in

    abuse of the offender’s authority as such officer, the offender

    is liable to imprisonment for 3 years.

The Courts

Planning and Environment Court

  1.  In 2011, I lodged a claim in the Planning and Environment for compensation under s5.4.5 of the IPA Act 1997.
  2. On the first court appearance Judge Rackemann ordered a Case Management Conference. At this conference, attended by myself and 2 Council solicitors, Court Registrar John Taylor declared himself chairman then took on the mouthpiece of Council and started to threaten and bully me to withdraw my claim; I was being stood over by a court officer.
  3. This fact of being stood over by court registrar John Taylor is acknowledged by Judge Chesterman in his Court of Appeal judgment summary and no action was taken against Taylor.
  4. In 2012 Buderim resident Mr. Kelly took action against the Maroochydore Council and was also stood over by Taylor. Mr. Kelly made complaints to the CMC and was ignored.
  5. The evidence is indisputable that court registrar John Taylor is employed by the state government to criminally stand over litigants.
  6. Judge Griffin SC in his summary states that the 2 extortion conditions: that Council had ‘no right’ to impose one of them and Council did not have the ‘jurisdiction’ to impose the other and therefore these crimes were sanitized by the court.
  7. Judge Griffin SC prevented me from tendering evidence being a letter from CEO Jude Munro being the basis of the claim where she states that I was issued a Planning and Development certificate also referred to as a Development Approval.
  8. Judge Griffin SC in his summary acknowledged the errors but dismissed my claim for not having a Planning and Development certificate being a copy of my Development Approval.

The Court of Appeal

  1. At the Court of Appeal hearing, I submitted and orally argued that Condition 19 in the development approval did not have ‘Legal Standing’ as no such term as a Prioritized Pedestrian Pathway was prescribed or described in City Plan 2000 or in the statutes of the IPA Act 1997.
  2. In fact Condition 19 was extortion and in Judge Chesterman’s summary this condition that was orally argued was not addressed.
  3.  Condition 30 also being a condition of extortion, Judge Chesterman stated it was not extortion as all was required was to produce a structural engineering certificate for other people’s retaining walls instead of constructing retaining walls at a cost of around $30,000.
  4. A structural engineering certificate cannot be produced unless the structure is constructed and even if one could be produced it would cost around $5,000. The quantum is of no significance as a benefit is still being given to other people, being a criminal offence. A public officer cannot obtain or attempt to obtain a benefit for himself, herself or any other person as the Queensland Criminal Code states.
  5. Condition 30 was the condition that Lord Mayor Newman signed off on instructions for a false engineering certificate to cover up the extortion.
  6. Despite sworn evidence presented to the Court of Appeal, being documentation downloaded from the Council website that confirmed that a Development Approval is also known as a Planning and Development certificate Judge Chesterman upheld Judge Griffin’s ruling that Council did not issue to me a Development and Planning Certificate but I had a Development Approval.
  7. Despite Lord Mayor’s Newman’s letter with full admission of 3 errors and writ in black and white ‘Administrative Error’, Judge Chesterman ruled that there were no errors.

The High Court

  1. Justice Gummow in a one page summary acknowledged I was issued a Planning and Development certificate but ruled, despite of Newman’s letter of admission of errors, that there were no errors to dismiss my claim.

Open Letter to Chief Justice Paul de Jersey

    1. The court items above are canvassed in detail with supporting documentation in the open letter to the Chief Justice, attached in bound form.
    2. This open letter of complaint to the Chief Justice was totally ignored.
    3. I submit to the committee that Judges Griffin, P&E court, Judge Chesterman, Muir and Lyons, Court of Appeal have blatantly misused their positions to issue rulings favourable to the Brisbane City Council to have my case dismissed, to do otherwise would have produced a Brisbane City Council and State Government criminal scandal involving Premier Newman.
    4. I further submit that not only is there no judicial independence and separation of powers; there is also no independence and separation of powers between the Newman Government and the Police, the CCC (CMC) and the Queensland Ombudsman.
    5. A corrupt State of affairs.


Date:               10/01/2014

BCC adv infringement

The fine for advertising Newman is a fraud.

1abcd12 copy

The ad? deemed by Council to be advertising.

cops conned

Police officers Sargent Van Boxel, Sargent Schodell, and Sen. Const. Plevey and my protest placard in the background.

There you have it peeps. Extortion, corrupt judges, a judicial standover man, fraud, false pretences, police intimidation, Mal Administration, Offences against political liberty, and a establishment conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and Abuse of Office.

Truly a corrupt State of Affairs.

And one day I just might get the hang of formatting on this site which is causing considerable angst.

%d bloggers like this: